Is this possible?

[Saffron]

I stumbled across this picture a few minutes ago and my eyes popped out ...

10 AIM-120s, 2 Sidewinders, and a drop tank?

Is this loadout even possible or is this a photoshop job.

If it is possible, is it in FC? (I haven't flown every aircraft configuration so maybe it is).

http://www.hughesmissiles.com/production_programs/amraam/amraam2.jpg

[Fleet Command CC]

Hello Saffron.

I would guess the F-18 could carry that loadout, but I bet it was fun getting the plane into the air. ;)

On wikipedia the F18 loadout capacity is 13,700 lb (6,215 kg) external fuel and ordnance, so the picture must be for real, but has we all know wikipedia can be wrong sometime.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_F/A-18_Hornet

Doing this in FC wouldn't be a problem a tall. :D If you would like to know how to add this loadout let me know. :cool:

[old_pop2000]

I stumbled across this picture a few minutes ago and my eyes popped out ...

10 AIM-120s, 2 Sidewinders, and a drop tank?

Is this loadout even possible or is this a photoshop job.

If it is possible, is it in FC? (I haven't flown every aircraft configuration so maybe it is).

http://www.hughesmissiles.com/production_programs/amraam/amraam2.jpg

The pictured loadout is valid but non-standard. The F-18 can carry 2 sidewinders on the wing tip launchers and 10 AMRAAM's.

[Saffron]

Okay, thanks for letting me know ... I've never seen anything like it.

And sure, FCCC ... might be interesting to play around with now that I know this loadout is possible if not likely.

[old_pop2000]

Okay, thanks for letting me know ... I've never seen anything like it.

And sure, FCCC ... might be interesting to play around with now that I know this loadout is possible if not likely.

FYI

F-18 A has 9 weapons stations - 1 & 9 are the wing tip stations

F-18 E/F has 11 weapons stations - two extra near the wing tips. Normal loadout for air interception improved is 2 x AIM 9s and 6 AIM-120s. Max is 8 x AIM-120s.

[Swordfish]

Remember that AAMs are rather lightweight. The problem with arming a fighter - like the F/A-18 Hornet - with AAMs is probably that they're sometimes awkwardly shaped, not their weight.

[old_pop2000]

Remember that AAMs are rather lightweight. The problem with arming a fighter - like the F/A-18 Hornet - with AAMs is probably that they're sometimes awkwardly shaped, not their weight.

Remember that an aircraft starts with a basic configuration and load. This generates a particular amount of drag and drag means more thrust and that means more fuel. This is the baseline performance of the aircraft and associated flight characteristics. Everything you add to the wings and fuselage hard points adds weight and drag and degrades the aircrafts basic performance and flight characteristics. Each particular store has its own individual aerodynamic characteristics spelled out in the TACMAN. While some wing configurations are authorized, they are not legal with certain fuselage store combinations. There might be load arrangements that are supported but not allowed. G forces and limitations must be calculated for the final load arrangement.

As to the wing configuration issue, specific test were conducted in Australia on the two AIM-120 missile separation and it was finally determined through wind tunnel test that the missiles could separate cleanly.

Weapons loading on the E model is much more complicated by the addition of the two extra hardpoints. For mission planning, there is a program called WEPS that assists. It knows what is legal and what is not, and calculates loads and flight characteristics. I don't know much more about it than that.

[Christian Schwietzke]

An AIM-120 is not a fire and forget missile. It's primary mode is the command inertial mode in which an RF data link is used to provide targeting updates every .5 to 1 sec. The missile is very dependent on the information quality from the aircraftl. So, this does impose limitations on the number of missiles carried.

I would have thought this would primarily put a limit on the number of missiles in the air at the same time... or at least the number of different targets engaged simultaneously.

Are there also problem when several aircraft are close to each other, each trying to guide its own AIM-120 to target? You know, from missiles not being able to tell which signal is theirs.

[old_pop2000]

I would have thought this would primarily put a limit on the number of missiles in the air at the same time... or at least the number of different targets engaged simultaneously.

Are there also problem when several aircraft are close to each other, each trying to guide its own AIM-120 to target? You know, from missiles not being able to tell which signal is theirs.

The RF link is used in a prelaunch situation with no updates in flight, at least for the command inertial mode. Once the missile is fired, in this mode, it flies unaided to a predetermined point in the sky, with course corrections provided by the X band radar on board. However, in the presence of multiple targets it will require RF updates to ensure that it guides to the designed target. The missile will search a certain area termed the uncertainty volume around the point designated by the RF information when jamming is present. I am not certain but I would think that the RF data link frequencies are preset for each aircraft with subfrequencies within that band for each missile. Just a guess based on my knowledge. This is an area that is closely guarded as you might expect.

The point is that the AIM-120 is not a true fire and forget missile. It can and does require updates during the command phase of the missile trajectory. The launch and leave mode is really used in visual dogfights, when the target is within sight. The BVR mode, it does require the RF updates. I hope that explains a rather complicated system. Here is a good link by someone who seems to know this particular system better. Enjoy

http://www.jolly-rogers.com/airpower/aim-120/avionics.html

[Christian Schwietzke]

Okay, I see... more or less at least.

And I remember that the F-14/AIM-120 combination was conceived primarily to handle a massive Badger/Backfire raid on a carrier group - they wouldn´t be any good at that if the missiles couldn´t be used en masse.

[old_pop2000]

Okay, I see... more or less at least.

And I remember that the F-14/AIM-120 combination was conceived primarily to handle a massive Badger/Backfire raid on a carrier group - they wouldn´t be any good at that if the missiles couldn´t be used en masse.

Hi Christian:
The Navy retired the F-14 before the AIM-120 capability was installed in the aircraft. She never had AIM-120's.

Basically, an airborne fire control system performs three functions: Search, acquisition and Track

Search for targets
Acquire targets into the tracking system
Tracks targets with updates from the radar. F-18 can track six targets simultaneously.
Pilot chooses the weapons to use on the armaments panel
Missile RF system tunes to the aircraft onboard Xmitter
Tracking system sends inertial navigation coordinates of the target to the missile.
Pilot initiates launch when flight parameters are correct
Missile motor fires and missile heads toward the preset position in space. (Note: there are two modes of motor ignition. One is a cold launch where the missile is dropped and the motor fires at a predetermine distance from the aircraft. Second is a hot launch where the motor fires while the missile is on the rail.)
If this is a visual sighting missile shot, X band will turn on and correct the course and guide missile to the target.
If this is a BVR shot, X band will not turn on to prevent betraying the fact that a missile has been fired. Opponent aircraft have systems on board to detect X band missile radars and a strobe on the scope in the cockpit will give approximate direction.
During a BVR shot, command updates to the missile are by RF data link. Once within range of the X band radar, it now guides the missile the last short distance to the target. One of the advantages of the AIM-120 is that, the pilot can leave the area, and the missile will guide itself to the target without the RF data link updates. The AIM-7 sparrow did not have an onboard radar or processing system, it had to rely on the aircraft radar to illuminate the target and used the return RF energy to guide itself to the target. The AIM-120 has launch and leave capability. However, in heavy jamming or high target concentrations, it can get confused or simply miss the target. The missiles true fire and forget range is about 2 miles or 2200 yards. But the exact figure is classified and I wouldn't want to make a guess. I suspect that figure has changed with upgrades.

Missiles have six degrees of freedom. Roll, pitch and yaw. These are aligned with the earth coordinates. Roll is forward, pitch is right/left and yaw is up/down. This orientation is vital for the proper missile operation. This whole issue of missile guidance is more complex than you or I can believe. There are lead or lag pursuit issues, distance to launch figures; anyway, that is just some of factors necessary for a successfule intercept and kill. Fuzing is also important.

If you need more information, just ask. Most of the actual data parameters are classified as are the frequencies.

[Christian Schwietzke]

Hi Christian:
The Navy retired the F-14 before the AIM-120 capability was installed in the aircraft. She never had AIM-120's.



:o

My mistake... I was thinking of the AIM-54.

[old_pop2000]

:o

My mistake... I was thinking of the AIM-54.

No problem. It is a common misconception that the Tomcat was AIM-120 capable. It could carry the missiles, but did not have the wiring or weapons system software to launch them. However, it is reported that part of the AIM-120 electronics and antenna systems came from the C model of the AIM-54. Just hearsay, of course. ;)

[steel_selachian]

Doesn't surprise me. Part of the idea behind AMRAAM was to get a similar multi-target engagement capability into a package that didn't involve half a ton of payload per missile.

I imagine that if you wanted a max loadout air superiority or interception mission, you could make the Super Hornet a pretty lethal customer. I experimented with upping the F/A-18E AAW's loadout to 8xAIM-120D and 4xAIM-9X; four of them waxed about thirty Backfires without working up much of a sweat (several of those were gun kills). I imagine I could pack another four missiles onto that if I double-loaded all six underwing hardpoints.

[old_pop2000]

Doesn't surprise me. Part of the idea behind AMRAAM was to get a similar multi-target engagement capability into a package that didn't involve half a ton of payload per missile.

I imagine that if you wanted a max loadout air superiority or interception mission, you could make the Super Hornet a pretty lethal customer. I experimented with upping the F/A-18E AAW's loadout to 8xAIM-120D and 4xAIM-9X; four of them waxed about thirty Backfires without working up much of a sweat (several of those were gun kills). I imagine I could pack another four missiles onto that if I double-loaded all six underwing hardpoints.

Hi Steel:
I doubt that seriously, there are still wiring and software limitations on loads for the bird. 6 and 2 are the current limits for AIM-120s and AIM-9s. There are also structural and drag problems. BTW, my information(not going to tell you where it comes from) is that she can only carry AIM-9s on the wing tip launchers. I can't see why that is, but I have worked on the fire control systems that included the AIM-9 and I can't see any limitations.